But this article should be required reading for whiners who complain about the "wasted" fifth round pick that was used to acquire Smith.

I suspect the Steelers are equally ruthless about going for players they think might help and cutting those they realize don't.

The Pats, Colts, Steelers, etc don't have to make all picks count, contrary to Pats bashers in the media and out. Just as you don't have to outrun the bear, only outrun your partner, the Pats don't have to hit on every pick, they just have to assemble a better team than the other 31.

They won't do it by being conservative and trying to make sure there are no mistakes made that will make them look bad with fans. Not when the Colts and Steelers are doing it the smart way.

my first thought on reading this excellent article was that it's a damn shame that Boston can't draw NFL reporters who produce more pieces like this, with, of course, the exception of Reiss. Instead we deal with dross like Tomass and Miseryotti and transparent self-promoters in the national media like Ryan (never met a TV camera he didn't like) who'll say anything to bash the Pats to get his air time on the HSPN.

second thought. he's got it right. revenue sharing and the cap makes this a game where successful franchises are virtually dispassionate about players and are always thinking at least two or three years ahead; the milloy move being the first example and the seymour move the most recent example of the Belichick era. those who don't think that the pats have traded something important off in 2009 for that 2011 first rounder have their heads in the sand; but BB and others made a cold calculation that the tradeoff would be worth it.

It would be inaccurate to call professional sports the ultimate meritocracy. At times, superior players get jettisoned because of salary cap issues. Consider how close the Colts came to losing Jeff Saturday to free agency.

Still, it's more of a meritocracy than most businesses, and it's more of a meritocracy for good NFL franchises than it is for franchises that can't find their way.

The best teams know when to say goodbye, no matter how much it hurts, or how angry it might make the fan base, or even if it makes the franchise look bad.

Click to expand...

Not to mention this gem:

Smart people don't feel compelled to show others how smart they are -- or so I'm told.

my first thought on reading this excellent article was that it's a damn shame that Boston can't draw NFL reporters who produce more pieces like this, with, of course, the exception of Reiss. Instead we deal with dross like Tomass and Miseryotti and transparent self-promoters in the national media like Ryan (never met a TV camera he didn't like) who'll say anything to bash the Pats to get his air time on the HSPN.

second thought. he's got it right. revenue sharing and the cap makes this a game where successful franchises are virtually dispassionate about players and are always thinking at least two or three years ahead; the milloy move being the first example and the seymour move the most recent example of the Belichick era. those who don't think that the pats have traded something important off in 2009 for that 2011 first rounder have their heads in the sand; but BB and others made a cold calculation that the tradeoff would be worth it.

Click to expand...

I agree. Nice article, and I think they got it right. Lack of sentimentality (and memory regarding past mistakes) is key to moving forward. It doesn't matter how much Rodney Harrison or Tedy Bruschi gave to the team in the past - it only matters whether they can carry their weight now. Of course we can honor them, try to give them organizational jobs, etc. But don't keep them on the field if they can't cut it anymore. Same thing with the trades. Don't dwell on the errors - John Starks, Chad Jackson, Greg Lewis, Alex Smith, etc. - just rectify them and move on. That's the key to staying on top.

For those that lament the cut-throat nature of the business, that's the way it is. The salary cap, roster limits, and the intensely competitive nature of the NFL mandate it. Otherwise you perish and go under, which benefits no one. As for Bruschi, Harrison, Seymour et al., they've made more in a few years than most of us will make in a lifetime.

I'm sorry to see the old guard go, but I'm relieved that we've finally gotten over some of the sentimentality that seemed to be holding the defense back. Never in history has a SB contender managed to totally renew its roster without going through a period of decline. It will be an amazing accomplishment if BB is able to complete the rebuilding of the Pats without ever losing out on being a SB contender.

If a run of barren years occur, I hope that Kraft would show some sentimentality to BB and not force him out, because of his faith and trust in the coach. Sometimes it would be nice if BB showed some of the same loyalty to some of the players...

What is loyalty? These guys get paid millions here and Seymour will get millions in Oakland or whereever. The only people who think it's smart to give an aging oft-injured DL a huge extension are moronic sportswriters, fanboys, and Al Davis.

If a run of barren years occur, I hope that Kraft would show some sentimentality to BB and not force him out, because of his faith and trust in the coach. Sometimes it would be nice if BB showed some of the same loyalty to some of the players...

Click to expand...

What loyalty is that? Who exactly do you feel BB has been unloyal to? Is there anyone on the team who deserves a sinecure, especially in the era of the salary cap?

I think BB is very loyal to his players ... but not to the point of sacrificing the team. His primary job responsibility is to the organization, not the players.

If a run of barren years occur, I hope that Kraft would show some sentimentality to BB and not force him out, because of his faith and trust in the coach. Sometimes it would be nice if BB showed some of the same loyalty to some of the players...

That's the point, isn't it? Maybe every move BB makes doesn't succeed, but what is the alternative? I can't think of another coach I would replace him with. That's not blind "In BB We Trust", it's a realization that we've got the best guy possible to steer the ship.

If a run of barren years occur, I hope that Kraft would show some sentimentality to BB and not force him out, because of his faith and trust in the coach. Sometimes it would be nice if BB showed some of the same loyalty to some of the players...

Click to expand...

I guess this all depends on how we define "barren years." The Cowboys went 13 seasons between Staubach's last and Aikman's first SB appearances and now haven't been back in 13 years again; the Niners haven't been back in 14 years and the Redskins in 17. The Packers went 28 years between Lombardi's last and Holmgren's first appearances and now haven't been back in 11 years. The Steelers went 15 years between Noll's last and Cowher's first SB appearances and then waited another nine years for Cowher's second appearance, for 24 years between wins.

I pick these franchises because they are among the storied franchises of the NFL, a club that the Patriots want to join and, IMHO, will eventually join.

I think what the Patriots are trying to do is avoid those kinds of droughts (though, in each case above there are different reasons, including dysfunctional ownerships in the 49ers case and perhaps excessive loyalty to Cowher and players like Kordell by the Rooney's).

I think it's also important to remember that the Krafts' stated objective for the Patriots is to be "competitive" for a championship every year; it is explicitly not to win the championship every year (so, a "barren" year for the Pats would be a year when they didn't make the Playoffs and win at least one game there, not when they didn't win the SB). I think they've concluded, rightly so, that there are far too many variables that come into play when it comes to winning the SB (like first game injuries to your Franchise player and magic helmet catches in the SB itself), to make the latter the objective. Whatever they might say to the public, I could see Kraft and Belichick closing the door in any August and admitting to each other "it's probably not going to happen this year, so this is what we should be doing so it can happen in two or three years."

And, to your opening comment, I do think that if, after discussion, Kraft concluded that BB had allowed the barren years to be worse than they had to be, I think he'd let him go.

my first thought on reading this excellent article was that it's a damn shame that Boston can't draw NFL reporters who produce more pieces like this, with, of course, the exception of Reiss. Instead we deal with dross like Tomass and Miseryotti and transparent self-promoters in the national media like Ryan (never met a TV camera he didn't like) who'll say anything to bash the Pats to get his air time on the HSPN.

second thought. he's got it right. revenue sharing and the cap makes this a game where successful franchises are virtually dispassionate about players and are always thinking at least two or three years ahead; the milloy move being the first example and the seymour move the most recent example of the Belichick era. those who don't think that the pats have traded something important off in 2009 for that 2011 first rounder have their heads in the sand; but BB and others made a cold calculation that the tradeoff would be worth it.

Click to expand...

This article is a good one, but Bob Kravitz is scum. Colts fans feel the same way.